Mother of San Bernardino victim backs Apple, says right to privacy 'makes America great'

Posted:
in iPhone edited February 2016
Carole Adams -- whose son Robert was killed in the San Bernardino attack last year -- has spoken out in support of Apple's position on encryption, saying the company "is definitely within their rights to protect the privacy of all Americans."


The makeshift memorial which appeared in San Bernardino following the shooting.


"This is what separates us from communism, isn't it?" Adams told the New York Post. "The fact we have the right to privacy."

"This is what makes America great to begin with, that we abide by a constitution that gives us the right of privacy, the right to bear arms, and the right to vote," she added.

Adams appears to be in the minority among those connected to the shooting. A number of victims and their families have announced plans to file a legal brief in support of the FBI.

"They were targeted by terrorists, and they need to know why, how this could happen," an attorney representing those victims said.

The battle between Apple and the FBI -- in which the bureau is asking Apple to create a special, backdoored version of iOS for use in unlocking the shooters' iPhone 5c -- has spilled over from the courtroom to the court of public opinion. A war of words has broken out, led by Apple CEO Tim Cook and FBI director James Comey, in which each side is working to paint the other as unreasonable.

"Fourteen people were slaughtered and many more had their lives and bodies ruined. We owe them a thorough and professional investigation under law. That's what this is," Comey wrote in a letter released Sunday.

"This case is about much more than a single phone or a single investigation, so when we received the government's order we knew we had to speak out," Cook shot back in an internal email on Monday. "At stake is the data security of hundreds of millions of law-abiding people, and setting a dangerous precedent that threatens everyone's civil liberties."
tallest skil
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,325member
    Kudos to Carole Adams.
    cincymacredgeminipajbdragonibillericthehalfbeejdgazbaconstangtallest skilnolamacguylolliver
  • Reply 2 of 29
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,689member
    It's a shame that she even had to speak up due to her loss, however I'm glad she saw through the govt power grab. 
    redgeminipajbdragonjdgazSpamSandwichcivabaconstangtallest skilcornchiplolliverewtheckman
  • Reply 3 of 29
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,594member
    Brave woman. 
    SpamSandwichcornchiplolliver
  • Reply 4 of 29
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,966member
    Why the other FBI supporters choose to be anonymous?  Apparently it is unAmerican to suppress privacy.  
    SpamSandwichciva
  • Reply 5 of 29
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,564member

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    civanolamacguy
  • Reply 6 of 29
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,328member
    maestro64 said:

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    That's a bit of a stretch to argue that this was not terrorism. It seems well established that they were radicalized (I dislike that term) in the Middle East, then came back here and committed mass murder against a target of convenience. I haven't seen any alternative motive proposed than supporting the ISIS struggle against the US.
    fotoformathlee1169jony0anton zuykovewtheckman
  • Reply 7 of 29
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,689member
    maestro64 said:

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    That's the definition of terrorism: an attack based on opposing ideology. There's evidence the wife was radicalized. 

    I thought there were witnesses that said the murderers said God is great. 


    fotoformatjomoejony0
  • Reply 8 of 29
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,564member
    muppetry said:
    maestro64 said:

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    That's a bit of a stretch to argue that this was not terrorism. It seems well established that they were radicalized (I dislike that term) in the Middle East, then came back here and committed mass murder against a target of convenience. I haven't seen any alternative motive proposed than supporting the ISIS struggle against the US.

    First he did not spend that much time there, maybe the wife, but since there is no evidence they were plotting this because they disagree with our government. Timothy McVeigh ideology was different than our government and his issue was with the government and he took it out on the government and its workers. These people too out people they had an issue with, and no one know what those issues were. All we have is one statement the wife made the day of their killing spree. As you pointed out people jump to answer that is more easier to explain.
    jungmark said:
    maestro64 said:

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    That's the definition of terrorism: an attack based on opposing ideology. There's evidence the wife was radicalized. 

    I thought there were witnesses that said the murderers said God is great. 



    You know the founding Father of this country was consider terrorist by the British government because they were not willing to stand in the line and shot at each other, our founding fathers hid behind trees in the woods and shot the British. Plus we disagreed with British government ideology, No saying this is the same thing, but it more than a definition.

    You could say any murder is then terrorism, since more people kill someone else because they disagree in ideology then just kill for no reason, in this case we do not now their specific reason.

    cornchipnolamacguyewtheckman
  • Reply 9 of 29
    tzeshan said:
    Why the other FBI supporters choose to be anonymous?  Apparently it is unAmerican to suppress privacy.  
    haha i like it. its because they dont want to be targeted.they all being paranoid.  if anything its unamercian not to have privacy. 
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 10 of 29
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,689member
    maestro64 said:
    muppetry said:
    That's a bit of a stretch to argue that this was not terrorism. It seems well established that they were radicalized (I dislike that term) in the Middle East, then came back here and committed mass murder against a target of convenience. I haven't seen any alternative motive proposed than supporting the ISIS struggle against the US.

    First he did not spend that much time there, maybe the wife, but since there is no evidence they were plotting this because they disagree with our government. Timothy McVeigh ideology was different than our government and his issue was with the government and he took it out on the government and its workers. These people too out people they had an issue with, and no one know what those issues were. All we have is one statement the wife made the day of their killing spree. As you pointed out people jump to answer that is more easier to explain.


    You know the founding Father of this country was consider terrorist by the British government because they were not willing to stand in the line and shot at each other, our founding fathers hid behind trees in the woods and shot the British. Plus we disagreed with British government ideology, No saying this is the same thing, but it more than a definition.

    You could say any murder is then terrorism, since more people kill someone else because they disagree in ideology then just kill for no reason, in this case we do not now their specific reason.

    McVeigh is a terrorist too. Not sure what point was to bring him up. 

    As for any murder? I don't know. What were the motivations? Passion/jealousy, theft, etc? Some murders could be treated as terrorism. 

    anton zuykov
  • Reply 11 of 29

    muppetry said:
    maestro64 said:

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    That's a bit of a stretch to argue that this was not terrorism. It seems well established that they were radicalized (I dislike that term) in the Middle East, then came back here and committed mass murder against a target of convenience. I haven't seen any alternative motive proposed than supporting the ISIS struggle against the US.
    MASS MURDER. that phrase is thrown around so lightly now. 14 ppl dead is not mass!! when we dropped the nukes that was MASS MURDER.  14 is not a massive amount of ppl.
    cornchip
  • Reply 12 of 29
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,966member
    muppetry said:
    maestro64 said:

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    That's a bit of a stretch to argue that this was not terrorism. It seems well established that they were radicalized (I dislike that term) in the Middle East, then came back here and committed mass murder against a target of convenience. I haven't seen any alternative motive proposed than supporting the ISIS struggle against the US.
    I read news the first few days after the killings that this man became mad because his coworker in the county health department made derogatory remarks on middle easterners.  
  • Reply 13 of 29
    I think this word gets thrown around a lot, but this is the definition that makes the most sense to me, even if it's awkwardly worded:

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism
    "the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal"

    However, I think there are most likely cases in which people are just generally pissed off and feeling desperate so they do something horrible mostly out of general personal rage rather than the cool and calculated means to an end, but attribute it to a political movement because it seems more justifiable in their eyes than the fact that they're just pissed off at the world for whatever reason. 

    hlee1169nolamacguyewtheckman
  • Reply 14 of 29
    I think they were all for terrorism, but were offended, so they went and killed a bunch of co-workers before they could put any terrorism plan into action.
  • Reply 15 of 29
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,689member
    tzeshan said:
    muppetry said:
    That's a bit of a stretch to argue that this was not terrorism. It seems well established that they were radicalized (I dislike that term) in the Middle East, then came back here and committed mass murder against a target of convenience. I haven't seen any alternative motive proposed than supporting the ISIS struggle against the US.
    I read news the first few days after the killings that this man became mad because his coworker in the county health department made derogatory remarks on middle easterners.  
    Perhaps. But they had amassed a large cache of weapons and ammo that any attack had to been planned well in advance. 
  • Reply 16 of 29
    jungmark said:
    tzeshan said:
    I read news the first few days after the killings that this man became mad because his coworker in the county health department made derogatory remarks on middle easterners.  
    Perhaps. But they had amassed a large cache of weapons and ammo that any attack had to been planned well in advance. 
    ...which indicates that this was in fact more spur of the moment. But I agree that there appears to have been a larger intent in play to commit mass muder.

    Which is completely beside the point. Apple cannot be held responsible for the  acts of others. And people's right to privacy trumps opening the Pandora's Box that invading that privacy sets up.
    cornchiplolliver
  • Reply 17 of 29
    muppetry said:
    maestro64 said:

    As far as I have seen no one has presented any evidence or data these two people were terrorist, The government has used this a catch all phase to lump anyone who does things which does not agree with what our government deems in their best interest.

    These two are not terrorist, they were bad people who parent failed to raise them properly and were hell bent on destruction, and they succeeded. This was someone who had a beef with people they worked with and decide to take out their vengeance on those people, they were not part of any group or organization which was plotting against the LA country Social Worker group.

    In typical fashion, the victims want answers to questions which do not exist, they want someone to say these bad people did this because of something specific like there were terrorist verse they were bad people who hated them for whatever their personal reasons.

    This is no different than the kid in Connecticut, who kills all those kid and with no reason, other than he had serious issues. So everyone blames the gun since it had to be the guns fault. So these people are blaming the iphone for there reason for not having answers.

    That's a bit of a stretch to argue that this was not terrorism. It seems well established that they were radicalized (I dislike that term) in the Middle East, then came back here and committed mass murder against a target of convenience. I haven't seen any alternative motive proposed than supporting the ISIS struggle against the US.
    it's not a stretch. it looks like another work-place shooting -- the victims were people the suspect knew and evidently had a beef with. that isnt how we normally define terrorism.
  • Reply 18 of 29

    jungmark said:
    tzeshan said:
    I read news the first few days after the killings that this man became mad because his coworker in the county health department made derogatory remarks on middle easterners.  
    Perhaps. But they had amassed a large cache of weapons and ammo that any attack had to been planned well in advance. 
    gathering weapons for a planned bad deed doesnt make it terrorism. were the Columbine shooters terrorists? or just two fucked up murderers who killed a bunch of people? thats what we normally call them. 
    lolliver
  • Reply 19 of 29
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,689member

    jungmark said:
    Perhaps. But they had amassed a large cache of weapons and ammo that any attack had to been planned well in advance. 
    gathering weapons for a planned bad deed doesnt make it terrorism. were the Columbine shooters terrorists? or just two fucked up murderers who killed a bunch of people? thats what we normally call them. 
    All goes to motivation. The columbine shooters wanted to be in the headlines. The San Bernardino ones? I guess we'll wait and see. At first it was workplace, but it has traces of terror. 
  • Reply 20 of 29
    anomeanome Posts: 1,269member
    jungmark said:
    tzeshan said:
    I read news the first few days after the killings that this man became mad because his coworker in the county health department made derogatory remarks on middle easterners.  
    Perhaps. But they had amassed a large cache of weapons and ammo that any attack had to been planned well in advance. 
    As I recall, the evidence at the time suggested they had been planning a terrorist action, but the actual attack was driven by a personal vendetta.

    I've never liked the insistance that terrorism involve a "political" or "ideological" motive, as this seems to largely be a way of excluding certain types of attack, that might otherwise be seen as instilling terror in the general populace.
Sign In or Register to comment.